共 50 条
A systematic pipeline of protein structure selection for computer-aided drug discovery: A case study on T790M/L858R mutant EGFR structures
被引:1
|作者:
Das, Agneesh Pratim
[1
,2
]
Nandekar, Prajwal
[3
]
Mathur, Puniti
[2
]
Agarwal, Subhash M.
[1
,4
]
机构:
[1] ICMR Natl Inst Canc Prevent & Res, Bioinformat Div, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
[2] Amity Univ Uttar Pradesh, Amity Inst Biotechnol, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
[3] Schrodinger India Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
[4] ICMR Natl Inst Canc Prevent & Res, Bioinformat Div, I-7,Sect 39, Noida 201301, Uttar Pradesh, India
关键词:
binding pose metadynamics;
cross docking;
drug discovery;
EGFR;
kinase;
structure selection;
virtual screening;
NONCOVALENT INHIBITORS;
RECEPTOR;
DOCKING;
RESISTANCE;
BINDING;
D O I:
10.1002/pro.4740
中图分类号:
Q5 [生物化学];
Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号:
071010 ;
081704 ;
摘要:
Virtual screening (VS) is a routine method to evaluate chemical libraries for lead identification. Therefore, the selection of appropriate protein structures for VS is an essential prerequisite to identify true actives during docking. But the presence of several crystal structures of the same protein makes it difficult to select one or few structures rationally for screening. Therefore, a computational prioritization protocol has been developed for shortlisting crystal structures that identify true active molecules with better efficiency. As identification of small-molecule inhibitors is an important clinical requirement for the T790M/L858R (TMLR) EGFR mutant, it has been selected as a case study. The approach involves cross-docking of 21 co-crystal ligands with all the structures of the same protein to select structures that dock non-native ligands with lower RMSD. The cross docking performance was then correlated with ligand similarity and binding-site conformational similarity. Eventually, structures were shortlisted by integrating cross-docking performance, and ligand and binding-site similarity. Thereafter, binding pose metadynamics was employed to identify structures having stable co-crystal ligands in their respective binding pockets. Finally, different enrichment metrics like BEDROC, RIE, AUAC, and EF1% were evaluated leading to the identification of five TMLR structures (5HCX, 5CAN, 5CAP, 5CAS, and 5CAO). These structures docked a number of non-native ligands with low RMSD, contain structurally dissimilar ligands, have conformationally dissimilar binding sites, harbor stable co-crystal ligands, and also identify true actives early. The present approach can be implemented for shortlisting protein targets of any other important therapeutic kinases.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文